What is "the handwriting of ordinances" that Christ nailed to the cross?

[joeb]

I've been studying this lately and have come up with what I believe to be the Biblical answer.  I've always rejected the idea that it was the moral law of God that Christ nailed to the cross for we know that one jot or tittle of the law will pass away. 

What do you believe "the handwriting of ordinances" refers to?  I've found a lot of OT info on this but my Bible study on this is not in any shape to present publicly yet.  I may have it ready in a few days, but I wanted to start this discussion now.

[Green Cochoa]

56 minutes ago, joeb said:

I've been studying this lately and have come up with what I believe to be the Biblical answer.  I've always rejected the idea that it was the moral law of God that Christ nailed to the cross for we know that one jot or tittle of the law will pass away. 

What do you believe "the handwriting of ordinances" refers to?  I've found a lot of OT info on this but my Bible study on this is not in any shape to present publicly yet.  I may have it ready in a few days, but I wanted to start this discussion now.

I think you meant NOT one jot or tittle will pass away.

The "handwriting of the ordinances" is said to be that which was "against us".  If you look carefully at the Ark of the Testimony, you will find that while the Decalogue, on its two tables of stone, was placed inside the Ark, a pocket on the outside, facing "against" the people, contained the handwritten ceremonial laws given to Moses with respect to observance of the types that would point us to Christ.  While God also wrote "by hand" the Ten Commandments, those writings were not positioned "against us."  

Once again, the KJV retains the clearest, and most error-free, truth on this doctrinal point.  The not-inspired version teaches that the entire law of God, including all of His commandments, has been abolished.  This is a MAJOR point of heresy.

Reference	Authorized Version (KJV)	Not-Inspired Version (NIV)
Ephesians 2:15	Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;	by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace,
Colossians 2:14	Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;	having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.
Colossians 3:6	For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:	Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.

Notice, in the above, that the NIV concludes simply that "the wrath of God is coming," because it cannot speak clearly of "children of disobedience" given that it claims there is no longer any law, and without law, what disobedience exists?

The part regarding the "law of commandments contained in ordinances" clearly connects us to the "ordinances" spoken of in the Old Testament.  The word "ordinances" was carefully used, and never applied to the Ten Commandments, even though one could technically class all words for law to cover any or all of God's commandments: precepts, ordinances, commandments, laws, testimonies, statutes, decrees, rules, regulations, etc.  Biblical usage of "ordinances" particularly applied to the types: in the Old Testament, to those pointing forward to Christ; in the New Testament, to those commemorating His sacrifice for us.

 

[phkrause]

I'm in agreement Green, have always been taught from way back that the "the handwriting of ordinances" were placed in the side of the Ark and the 10 Cs were placed into the Ark!

[Robert]

On 8/15/2016 at 0:34 AM, Green Cochoa said:

The "handwriting of the ordinances" is said to be that which was "against us".  

How was the "ceremonial laws" against us? 

Heb 10:1 For the Law...was only a shadow of the good things to come (i.e., Christ righteousness)...

verse 3: in those sacrifices (i.e., the ceremonial laws - see Lev 23) there is a reminder of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 

I submit to you that the "handwriting of the ordinances" was the record of our sins.  These sins were "against us" and placed in death row awaiting the judgment. 

 

[Robert]

10 minutes ago, Robert said:

verse 3: in those sacrifices (i.e., the ceremonial laws - see Lev 23) there is a reminder of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 

I submit to you that the "handwriting of the ordinances" was the record of our sins.  These sins were "against us" and placed in death row awaiting the judgment. 

Gal 3:22 "the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

23 Now before the faith (Jesus) came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned.....

To remain under law means death!  Why?  

Rom 3:9 For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written: None is righteous, no, not one.

[Green Cochoa]

27 minutes ago, Robert said:

How was the "ceremonial laws" against us? 

Heb 10:1 For the Law...was only a shadow of the good things to come (i.e., Christ righteousness)...

verse 3: in those sacrifices (i.e., the ceremonial laws - see Lev 23) there is a reminder of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 

I submit to you that the "handwriting of the ordinances" was the record of our sins.  These sins were "against us" and placed in death row awaiting the judgment. 

 

"Ordinances" are laws which God gave.  They cannot, therefore, be sins.  Perhaps you meant to say that transgressing them resulted in sins, and that these transgressions were recorded by hand.  But by whom?  If you say that the angels record our sins, is that not present tense?  And did that then cease at the cross?

I would submit to you that one of the primary reasons this verse has been misunderstood is the duality of English meanings present in the word "against."  In the Greek, it would not have meant "against" in the negative fashion which many see in that verse.  It would have been against only in the sense of direction.  To obviate this ambiguity, a better translation would be "toward," another of the words used to translate the Greek word "kata."  As I said earlier, the handwritings of Moses were placed toward the people, facing them, in the side of the ark.  It is to indicate which set of laws Paul speaks of that he uses this preposition.

[8thdaypriest]

WHAT WAS NAILED TO HIS CROSS?        

    Colossians 2:14 “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;” (KJV)

    Colossians 2:14 “. . . having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us.  And He has taken it out of the way, nailing it to His cross.” (NKJV)

    Colossians 2:14  “having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;” (ASV)

    Colossians 2:14 “having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. (NIV)

    Colossians 2:14 “having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” (NAS)

    Colossians 2:14 “erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the cross” (NRSV).

God wrote the Ten Commandments by hand (Deut. 4:13), but Moses wrote the “ordinances”.   So we have to keep the Ten Commandments, but everything else is now obsolete.  I think that is a complete misunderstanding of this passage!  

        I don’t think that Colossians 2:14 has anything to do with keeping some laws and discarding others. The entire Sinai covenant was rendered “obsolete” by the death of the betrothed “husband” - Yeshua Messiah, thus necessitating a NEW marriage covenant.  In that NEW Covenant - the LORD promises to write His Law on our hearts! 

THE RECORD OF OUR DEBT

        I think you can tell from the ASV, NIV, NRSV and NAS versions, that it was the charges, or the debt, or the “bond”, or the record of our transgressions (according to the law) - that was nailed to the cross.      

        We still use the expression today.  He has paid his debt to society, or his debt to the law.  We mean that the person has completed his sentence in prison.  
    
        It was common in the Roman Empire to post a placard over the accused at his execution, which listed the charges.  Paul is referring to this custom.  The charges against Christ were posted over His head - nailed to His cross.  “King of the Jews” it read.  The Sanhedrin tried to get Pilot to change it to “He said king of the Jews” but Pilot refused.  
    
    In the eyes of Heaven, OUR DEBT was posted over His head.  The DEBT - the broken covenant - with its attendant CURSE.  We are under the CURSE of the Covenant, if we try to attain salvation through "works of the law". 

This is why the Sinai Covenant was called "the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones" (2Co 3:7).

    It was OUR DEBT which He paid - our CURSE which He took.

    Isaiah 53:6  “All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all” (NKJ).

    For those who come to Him in faith, the debt is forgiven.  The record of our transgression is “wiped out”.  It was nailed to His cross!

Here are links to studies on this topic at my website:

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/40e-The Curse of the Law.pdf

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/40fba-A Debt Paid.pdf

http://prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/40-TWO COVENANTS.pdf

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/40fa-The Yoke of Bondage.pdf

 

[8thdaypriest]

The best way to prove the END of animal sacrifices, is to show that the priesthood was CHANGED under the NEW Covenant. 

And to show that there really IS a NEW Covenant. 

The Sinai Covenant was a Covenant of Marriage.

The Sinai Covenant - all of it - was rendered "obsolete" with the death of the "husband" of Israel. 

New Marriage = New Marriage Covenant

The New Marriage Covenant = "I will write My Law on your hearts."  "I will be your God, and you will be My people." 

[Green Cochoa]

15 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The best way to prove the END of animal sacrifices, is to show that the priesthood was CHANGED under the NEW Covenant. 

And to show that there really IS a NEW Covenant. 

The Sinai Covenant was a Covenant of Marriage.

The Sinai Covenant - all of it - was rendered "obsolete" with the death of the "husband" of Israel. 

New Marriage = New Marriage Covenant

The New Marriage Covenant = "I will write My Law on your hearts."  "I will be your God, and you will be My people." 

The problem with this nice-sounding reasoning is that in actual fact the "new" covenant is actually the older of the two.  It was and is the "everlasting covenant" that has always existed.  

[joeb]

OK.  Here's a hint.  Green Cochoa is on the right track.  Go read Dueteronomy starting with chapter 7 or 8 and on through the end of the book.  Moses is giving a set of laws to the Israelites just before his death.  He calls this set of laws a covenant between Israel and God, and in this covenant there are specific blessings for obedience and specific curses for disobedience.   The Isrealites were told they were to repeat this covenant after they entered the Promised land and then repeat the performance once of 7th year on the year of liberty when the Isrealites who had sold themselves into servanthood were released through law of ga'al.  Did they?  Yes.  Joshua had one half the people stand on Mt. Gerizim(the mount of blessings) and the other half of them to stand on Mt. Ebal(the mount of curses) after AI was destroyed.   They repeated this every 7th year until they would rebel against God and go their own way. 

If you look at the history of the COI/Jews you will see that the very curses the people pronounced upon themselves for disobedience were carried out.  They experienced them in reality.  Moses told them that if they would repent when they fell into sin that God would "circumcise the foreskins of their hearts" and they could once more obey God and love Him.  Just one more OT reference to the new birth experience....

Moses wrote this set of laws out with his own hand in the presence of the people and the set of laws was stored on the outside of the ark of the covenant.  It was not stored inside beneath the mercy seat with the 10 Commandments.  This is clear evidence that both Moses and the COI understood that the 10 commandments and the set of laws he gave them at that time were separate and distinct sets of laws.  That the law itself contains the curses is very significant.  It shows that disobedience to these laws would result in these laws being held against them and they would experience the curses contained in the law if the disobeyed, but would experience the blessings of the law if they obeyed.  

This is the only set of laws given to the COI that had specific punishments written into it for disobedience.   It the only "handwriting of ordinances held against them, and contrary to them" because of the way it was worded and how they were told to repeat this law every 7 years so that it could not fall out of the consciousness of the people from generation to generation.  You couldn't grow up as an Israelite and not know these things.  

[joeb]

I said, Moses told them that God would circumcise the foreskins of the heart.  A slight misstatement on my part.  It was actually written into the law.

[8thdaypriest]

4 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

The problem with this nice-sounding reasoning is that in actual fact the "new" covenant is actually the older of the two.  It was and is the "everlasting covenant" that has always existed.  

Just as the Melchizedek priesthood is OLDER than the Aaronic.  And Melchizedek priests offered animal sacrifices - ever since the sin of Adam.  What does that prove?

I do not agree that the "everlasting covenant" is the same as the "new covenant".

The "everlasting covenant" said, "All who SIN, DIE". 

The "new covenant" says, "I will heal you.  I will write My Law on your heart."   

The "everlasting covenant" applied to every sentient being.  The "new covenant" applies only to those who enter in to that covenant - through Christ.

[Green Cochoa]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Just as the Melchizedek priesthood is OLDER than the Aaronic.  And Melchizedek priests offered animal sacrifices - ever since the sin of Adam.  What does that prove?

I do not agree that the "everlasting covenant" is the same as the "new covenant".

The "everlasting covenant" said, "All who SIN, DIE". 

The "new covenant" says, "I will heal you.  I will write My Law on your heart."   

The "everlasting covenant" applied to every sentient being.  The "new covenant" applies only to those who enter in to that covenant - through Christ.

 

Quote

     The terms of this oneness between God and man in the great covenant of redemption were arranged with Christ from all eternity. The covenant of grace was revealed to the patriarchs. The covenant made with Abraham four hundred and thirty years before the law was spoken on Sinai was a covenant confirmed by God in Christ, the very same gospel which is preached to us. "The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham." The covenant of grace is not a new truth, for it existed in the mind of God from all eternity. This is why it is called the everlasting covenant. The plan of redemption was not conceived after the fall of man to cure the dreadful evil; the apostle Paul speaks of the gospel, the preaching of Jesus Christ, as "the revelation of the mystery, which hath been kept in silence through times eternal, but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith." (Revised Version.) 
                                                                -
  {ST, August 24, 1891 par. 10}  

 

[8thdaypriest]

21 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

 

 

First Green:  I do not accept the writings of EGW as Scripture.

Second:  What covenant did the LORD make with Adam and Eve then ?  Was it the everlasting covenant?   

[8thdaypriest]

5 hours ago, jackson said:

Looking at Col2:16 . Paul says let no man therefore judge you on these things. Why? Because "these things" were no longer laws. They were nailed to the cross. That is why the temple curtain was split in twain upon Christ's death. The Most Holy Place was open to view to all present.

 

I think we talked about which curtain was torn.  Mrs White says it was the curtain between the HP and MHP.  Temple scholars (like Joseph Good who built the famous Temple model in Jerusalem) say it was the outer curtain - the one that everyone could SEE. 

1.  It was the custom for a father to tear his robe upon hearing of the death of his Son - especially a firstborn.  God the Father tore HIS "robe". 

2.  In the Temple of Herod, TWO overlapping curtains separated the HP from the MHP.  They overlapped with a 3 foot walking space between them.  The High Priest would enter at the end of the curtain closest to the HP.  He would traverse the length of both curtains, to exit into the MHP around the end of the curtain closest to the MHP.  

The only single curtain that could have been torn from top to bottom, was the outer curtain through which priests entered the First Apartment - the HP.

3.  If only the veils separating the HP from the MHP were torn, then only the priests would know.  "All present" would NOT have known.

[8thdaypriest]

5 hours ago, jackson said:

In understanding of Col 2:14, It is essential to look at the verses directly after 2:14 which continue and finish Paul's line of thought.

  Col 2:16( says) let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]:   2:17   Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.

 

If the "New Moon" celebration (which included the offering of animal sacrifices) was "nailed to the cross" and is therefore abolished, and was only a "shadow of things to come", then WHY is it included - right along with the Sabbath, in the New Earth?

Isaiah 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD." (KJV)

I believe the animal sacrifices were rendered OBSOLETE by the death of Jesus - NOT the Lord's appointed Feasts.  I believe those Feasts of the LORD will be continued in the Kingdom. 

"Let no man therefore judge you" . . . "in respect of an holy day",  can just as legitimately mean "judge you concerning the WAY in which you honor and remember those holy days" - without blood sacrifices, rather than "judge you concerning" whether or not you honor those days - at all.

I find great meaning in honoring and remembering those holy days - at their appointed times in the Hebrew calendar.  It's certainly better than celebrating Christmas or Easter.   At least the Feast sabbaths were appointed by God, rather than of pagan origin.   

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

19 hours ago, jackson said:

i should not have said Most Holy Place and I usually just say "temple innards". as the Bible does not specify. That said, no one  but priests were to see the innards of the temple, so the renting of the veil . violated its sacredness.

As Daniel prophesied, the Messiah in the middle of the week was to cause sacrifices and oblations to cease. What better sign then to  miraculously  desecrate the temple where sacrifices and oblations were centered at the very prophesied time. 

        The LORD made a covenant with Israel at Mt Sinai, which was still in effect at the time of Jesus’ death.  It certainly was not limited to “one week”.  The “New Covenant” did not take effect until Christ died, and it is still in effect.   I know of no covenant which God or Christ made with anyone for only 7 days, or 7 years.  Let’s look at the passage again.

Daniel 9:27 “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.  And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate.” (NKJ)

        The one who makes a covenant for one “seven” is the same “one” who will “bring an end to sacrifice and offering”.  He is the one who “will destroy the City and the Sanctuary”.  Who is he?  
        Let’s look at two verses from another prophecy given to Daniel.
 
Daniel 11:31 “Forces sent by him shall occupy and profane the Temple and fortress. They shall abolish the regular burnt offering and set up the abomination that makes desolate.” (NRS)

        NOTE: In this passage, the one who will abolish the regular burnt offering, is ALSO the one who will set up the abomination that causes desolation.  This doesn’t sound like something Jesus would do.   Notice: The abomination of desolation is set up in place of, the regular (continual) burnt offering.
 
     Daniel 12:11 “From the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away and the abomination that desolates is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred ninety days.” (NRS)

        The regular sacrifice is abolished, and the abomination is set up - at the SAME time.

Jesus did not desecrate the Temple or bring an end to sacrifice at the Temple (by force).  The Romans did THAT.  They leveled the Temple and put up a pagan Temple to Jupiter.  

This scenario will be repeated during the last years of this age!

 

[8thdaypriest]

11 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

  Jesus did not desecrate the Temple or bring an end to sacrifice at the Temple (by force).  The Romans did THAT.  They leveled the Temple and put up a pagan Temple to Jupiter.  

This scenario will be repeated during the last years of this age!

 

The Romans did NOT make a covenant with the Jews for "one week" beginning 3.5 years before Jesus died.  The final Antichrist WILL.

[8thdaypriest]

You say the "handwriting of ordinances" was those laws which were written by the hand of Moses at the dictation of the LORD.   That would include the Law concerning clean and unclean foods, the Law concerning quarantine of those with disease, the Law concerning the separation of anyone with a "flow of blood", the Law concerning debt slavery, the Law concerning charging interest to a fellow Israelite. 

The celebration of the "LORD's appointed Feasts" could NOT have been nailed to the cross, because there are Scriptures pointing to Feasts in the New Earth. 

I believe the WAY in which the Feasts are to be celebrated was changed when the priesthood was changed from Aaronic to Melchizedek. 

The Feasts - which were prophetic, will be celebrated as memorials of those things which Christ did for us. 

[8thdaypriest]

"the handwriting of ordinances which were against us"

How were the LORD's appointed Feasts "against" the Israelites??

[8thdaypriest]

Galatians 4:9,10  “But how after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years.”

        ANSWER:  The “days, and months, and seasons, and years” obviously refer to the prophetic “Feasts of the LORD” commanded in Leviticus chapters 23 and 25, and Numbers chapters 28 and 29. 

            The Galatians who had come to belief in Christ, had been taken in by the circumcision party who were “zealous for the law.”   They had themselves circumcised, and began observing all of the Hebrew festivals in the “old” way, including the offering of animal sacrifices at Jerusalem,  in order to be saved.  

            “Tell me,” Paul wrote, “you who desire to be under the law [to be justified by law keeping]” (Gal. 4:21).  These are the people who were returning to "weak and beggarly elements".  He was adamant that we are saved by faith in Christ - not by “works of the law” [the old sacrificial remedy].  
   
            Keeping the Jewish festivals in order to be saved would be no better than observing pagan astral festivals in order to live forever.  Both involved a type of salvation by works, and so Paul called it a return to “weak and beggarly elements.”

        ANSWER:  The key word in this passage is the word “observe” in verse 10.  This is the Greek word “paratereo” (#3906).  This word is translated “watch” in four other New Testament passages, the meaning being to watch someone closely to catch him in a transgression, or to capture him.  

            The Pharisees “watched” Jesus to catch Him in some trespass (Mar. 3:2, Luke 6:7, Luke 14:1, Luke 20:20).  The men who had vowed to kill Paul “lay in wait” (Acts 9:24).  In every passage sited, it’s the same word - translated as “observe” in Galatians 4:10.

            In the Septuagint translation the word is used describing how the advisors and governors of Darias “watched” Daniel to catch him praying to his God, so they could throw him to the lions (Dan. 6:10).  Other uses of the word in the Hebrew (zamam - #2161) convey negative intent.  In Psalm 37:12, the wicked  “plot” and in Psalm 31:13, “They scheme to take away my life.”  

            Our conclusion is that to “observe” the “days, months, seasons, and years” is to keep them legalistically, in great detail - in order to be saved.  This we agree, is not the New Testament way. 

        ANSWER:  The “weak and beggarly elements” were  the animal sacrifices, and the Levitical Aaronic priesthood.  They were “weak” because they could not “make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience” (Heb. 9:9).  

        I do not believe that the Feasts themselves were “weak and beggerly elements”.  I believe that the animal sacrifices which were offered on these Feast Days were “weak and beggerly” when compared with the perfect sacrifice of Christ our LORD.  

            At this present time,there is nothing to be accomplished by travel to Jerusalem for the Feasts, until our LORD returns and has restored the City.  There is no Temple.  The LORD is not there.   

[joeb]

On 8/18/2016 at 10:01 AM, jackson said:

In understanding of Col 2:14, It is essential to look at the verses directly after 2:14 which continue and finish Paul's line of thought.

  Col 2:16( says) let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]:   2:17   Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.

If Paul, in Col2:16 ,were speaking of the charges against us that were nailed to the cross, he would have not just used ceremonial  rules and restrictions, such as Sabbath days, feasts, meat and drink. He would have at least said something about murder, adultery , lying etc. Those were by far the most serious charges against us. But he listed only ceremonial laws in verse 2:16.

Looking at Col2:16 . Paul says let no man therefore judge you on these things. Why? Because "these things" were no longer laws. They were nailed to the cross. That is why the temple curtain was split in twain upon Christ's death. The Most Holy Place was open to view to all present. This was forbidden under the ceremonial law. But Christ was now High Priest. His blood was offered instead of the blood of animals. The whole sacrificial system with its laws and ceremonies was done away with now. Never again would that system be in force . The world now had a high priest  in the heavenly sanctuary:

In addition , it would not make sense that any of the certificates against us could be nailed to the cross. All sins against us could only be forgiven by our repentance and submission to Christ and the pleading of  His blood to the Father in the heavenly sanctuary. That is how sins are forgiven. If they were all nailed to the cross there would be no need of repentance and all men and women would have been forgiven by divine edict at Christ's death regardless of whether they were repentant or not. There is no forgiveness without repentance.

Acts 2:38   Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins} and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 3:19  Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out} when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Matt 4:17   From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:} for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 

Luke 13:3   I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.}

No "certificates of our sins" were nailed to the cross. The ceremonial law with its types and shadows of the heavenly sanctuary were nailed to the cross. The "newer" Bible versions stand the gospel on its head.

jackson,

There is a serious flaw in this thinking and once I explain what it is I think you will agree that it is fatal to this idea.

All of the ceremonial laws, the cermonial sabbaths, all the feasts, all of the rites and ceremonies associated with the sanctuary and its services had only one reason for existance.  What was that reason?  To teach the COI/Jews about the coming Savior and the plan of salvation.  These things were all for their benefit.  They were designed to lead the the people to God.  I think, from what I've read of your posts you agree with this.

Now, if we are to assume that all these things are then "opposed" to the COI/Jews, then we must agree that the Bible is opposed to us for it teaches us about our Savior and the plan of salvation.  Why "opposed" because the Greek word Paul used that is translated as "contrary" actually means "opposed" according to Strong's Concordance. 

Secondly, I can find no reference in the OT that any of this was given by God to "oppose" His people. 

If you can find Biblical evidence to answer all this I'm more than ready to hear it, but I don't believe it exists. 

[joeb]

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

        The LORD made a covenant with Israel at Mt Sinai, which was still in effect at the time of Jesus’ death.  It certainly was not limited to “one week”.  The “New Covenant” did not take effect until Christ died, and it is still in effect.   I know of no covenant which God or Christ made with anyone for only 7 days, or 7 years.  Let’s look at the passage again.

 

The Lord also made another covenant with the COI after Sinai.  He made it with them just before they entered into the Promised Land and it contained clearly defined blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience.  Go read the evidence in Deuteronomy 7 - 34. 

[joeb]

Dueteronomy 31:19 Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel.

 

[joeb]

Deuteronomy 30: 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: